1985 PLP 1919 (SCMR)
Ch. RAFIQ AHMAD SHAD — Petitioner Versus THE PUNJAB ROAD TRANSPORT BOARD
| Citation | 1985 PLP 1919 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Aslam Riaz Hussain, Muhammad Afzal Zullah and |
| Parties | Ch. RAFIQ AHMAD SHAD — Petitioner Versus THE PUNJAB ROAD TRANSPORT BOARD |
| Primary Law | Supreme Court Rules, 1980 |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1985 PLP 1919 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Supreme Court Rules, 1980 as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1985 PLP 1919 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Aslam Riaz Hussain, Muhammad Afzal Zullah and.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1985 PLP 1919 (SCMR) (Ch. RAFIQ AHMAD SHAD — Petitioner Versus THE PUNJAB ROAD TRANSPORT BOARD). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ch. Ghulam Qadir, Advocate Supreme Court and Ch. Mehdi Khan Mehtab, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 24th June, 1985.
- Ch. Ghulam Qadir, Advocate Supreme Court and Ch. Mehdi Khan Mehtab, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
(Contempt application by Ch. Rafiq Ahmad Shad in Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 1503 of 1980, dismissed by this Court on 12th December, 1982).
O. XXVII, r. 1--Contempt proceedings--Maintainability of--Service Tribunal granting relief to petitioner with consequential benefits- Supreme Court dismissed respondent's petition for leave to appeal against order of Tribunal without granting any relief to petitioner--Respondent failing to implement order of Tribunal--Contempt application moved by petitioner before Supreme Court--On respondent's contending that it was in process of calculating amount due to petitioner, contempt application dismissed as premature--Petitioner again filing contempt application stating that no payment was made to him in pursuance of Tribunal's order--Held: Supreme Court had merely dismissed petition for leave to appeal filed by respondent and had not granted any relief to petitioner--Breach of any direction or order, if at all, is that of order of Tribunal--Petitioner to 'pursue his remedy before proper forum--Con tempt. application dismissed as incompetent.
Judgment & Decree
ASLAM RIAZ HUSSAIN, J.‑‑The petitioner was an employee of the Punjab Road Transport Board. He was promoted to the post of Controller of Stores in Grade‑18, by the Chairman of the said Board on 12‑1‑1977. This order was, however, set aside by the Punjab Road Transport Board on the ground that the Chairman did not have the power to pass the above‑noted order. The petitioner filed an appeal against the order of the Board before the Punjab Services Tribunal which set aside the order of the Board upholding the order of the Chairman vide its judgment, dated 21‑9‑1980. The concluding paragraph whereof reads as follows:‑‑ "Consequently the appeal succeeds and the order, dated 31‑1‑1977 is set aside and the order, dated 12‑1‑1977, is restored with all the consequential benefits." The Board challenged this order through a petition for leave to appeal (No. 1503 of 1980), which was dismissed by this Court. Subsequently the petitioner moved a contempt application (No. 12 of 1982) alleging that the petitioner had been applying but the benefits directed by the Services Tribunal to be given to him had not yet been given to him by the respondent Board.
2. It was contended on behalf of the Board that it was in the process of calculating the amount due to the petitioner. The contempt application was, therefore, dismissed as premature.
3. He has again filed the present contempt application stating that no payment has yet been made in pursuance of the order of the Punjab Services Tribunal.
4. We have considered the question and feel that this Court had merely dismissed the petition for leave to appeal filed by the Board and had not granted any relief to Ch. Rafique Ahmad Shad (present petitioner) and the breach of any direction or order, if at all, is that of the order of the Punjab Services Tribunal. It is, therefore, open to the petitioner to pursue his remedy before the proper forum.
5. This application is, consequently, dismissed as incompetent. M. I. Application dismissed.